The Other Significant Others by Rhaina Cohen – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Why do we place romantic partnership on a pedestal? What do we lose when we expect one person to meet all our needs? And what can we learn about commitment, love, and family from people who put deep friendship at the center of their lives?

In The Other Significant Others, NPR's Rhaina Cohen invites us into the lives of people who have defied convention by choosing a friend as a life partner. Their riveting stories unsettle widespread assumptions about relationships, including the idea that sex is a defining feature of partnership and that people who raise kids together should be in a romantic relationship. Platonic partners from different walks of life—spanning age and religion, gender and sexuality and more—reveal the freedom and challenges of embracing a relationship model that society doesn't recognize. And they show that orienting your world around friends isn't just the stuff of daydreams and episodes of The Golden Girls, but possible in real life.

Based on years of original reporting and drawing on striking social science research, Cohen argues that we make romantic relationships more fragile by expecting too much of them, while we undermine friendships by expecting too little of them. She traces how, throughout history, our society hasn’t always fixated on marriage as the greatest source of meaning, or even love. At a time when many Americans are spending large stretches of their lives single, widowed or divorced, or feeling the effects of the "loneliness epidemic," Cohen makes the case that one model of a flourishing adulthood—lifelong romantic partnership—isn't enough. A rousing and incisive book, The Other Significant Others challenges us to ask what we want from our relationships—not just what we’re supposed to want—and transforms how we define a fulfilling life.’

The Other Significant Others is a book on adult relationships other than monogamous relationships written by the journalist and social commentator, Rhaina Cohen. The book starts with the premise as to how society tends to promote certain types of relationships more than others. This is all the more pertinent when governments tend to provide tax benefits to married couples or in some countries (like France), to registered civil partnerships but it is not extended to other co-dependent adult relationships.

The writer brings about the story of people from several walks of life, and also different sexual identities (straight, gay, asexual, polyamorous, etc.). The author certainly brings about an important conversation that needs to be had, given relationships of adults no longer revolve around the family system. The author gives several examples of adults who lived together as platonic friends under the same roof, sometimes for financial reasons but other times, even for non-tangible reasons such as emotional support and companionship.

While the author did bring about an important subject, this book was a dull and difficult read for me. To start with, she went too deep into personal stories of people who did not interest me. She had established her point within the first 30 pages and anything beyond that felt like a pointless repetition and more and more anecdotal stories to establish the same fact.

The book is also very US centric, which is not something I would blame the author for, but again, people from certain cultures might feel the points are not relevant for them. For instance, she talks about ‘touch’ being important in forming a close relationship and it is usually frowned upon in non-romantic contexts; which might be true of US, but is not true in several other parts of the world, several cultures within South Asia for instance where touching in platonic friendships is normal. So, if one is reading this book from outside the US, they would need to accordingly adapt it to their circumstances.

I also feel that there are many economic / legal factors for which things are moving not as fast as they ought to. To put in my personal opinion, I do not agree with the governments de facto establishing certain relationships to be more privileged than others (especially with falling birth rates in the West – with many countries often giving several handouts to families with young children), I can understand it while disagreeing with it. However, the author does not address much of these points in this book.

To conclude, I would say that the author brought up a discussion that is necessary to be had in the society. However, this should not have been more than an op-ed in a newspaper and the book did not establish anything new nor did I have any moments of epiphany upon reading this book. On that note, I would award the book a rating of four on ten.

Rating – 4/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

On Abolition of All Poltical Parties by Simone Weil

 

Note: I read the essay in French

Cliquez ici afin de lire mon avis en français

On the Abolition of All Political Parties is a short essay by the French philosopher and activists, Simone Weil, known for her engagement with the trade unions and anarchists. There are only 48 pages in my edition and is very easy to read.

A powerful quote that I liked at the beginning of the essay was – ‘Parties are organisations officially constituted to systematically kill the soul of truth and justice’ (translated by me).

She argues for a system that prioritises justice and truth in politics, which according to her is not possible so long as political parties exist.

As it is a political essay, I need to add my personal opinions as well. Her arguments are well presented but she has given a solution that is too simple for a very complex problem. It is true that political parties curtail the powers of an individual elected representative by imposing the party line. However, in any gathering, there would be some natural evolution towards the regrouping among individuals with similar ideas and goals which would eventually lead to formation of some sort of a political grouping similar to that of political parties we have today. An example of this is Nebraska in the US, which officially has a non-partisan legislature, but the elected representatives group themselves as Democrats and Republicans anyway.

To conclude, I would say that this is an interesting essay and a discussion that we ought to have in the society to improve the quality of political discussions and debate, but her arguments present both the strengths and shallowness of her proposal at the same time. I award the essay a rating of six on ten.

Rating – 6/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

Flowers of Darkness by Tatiana de Rosnay – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Author Clarissa Katsef is struggling to write her next book. She’s just snagged a brand new artist residency in an ultra-modern apartment, with a view of all of Paris, a dream for any novelist in search of tranquility. But since moving in, she has had the feeling of being watched. Is there reason to be paranoid? Or is her distraction and discomfort the result of her husband’s recent shocking betrayal? Or is that her beloved Paris lies altered outside her windows? A city that will never be quite the same, a city with a scar at its center?

Stuck inside, in the midst of a sweltering heat wave, Clarissa enlists her beloved granddaughter in her investigation of the mysterious, high tech building even as she finds herself drawn back into the orbit of her first husband who is still the one who knows her most intimately, who shares the past grief that she has never quite let go.’

Note: I read the French version of the book

Cliquez ici afin de lire mon avis en français

Flowers of Darkness is a novel by Tatiana de Rosnay published in 2020. The main character of the novel is Clarissa Kastel, an old writer past her prime in her 70s, has just moved to Paris. It is not the Paris of today but in an unspecified date in the future, highly impacted by climate change, artificial intelligence and terror attacks. For instance, the Eiffel Tower no longer exists, destroyed by a recent terrorist attack, and since this event, the city has changed a lot.

Clarissa moves into a residence that is dedicated to artists and writers, called CASA where everything inside the house is managed by an AI assistant, to whom Clarissa gives the name Mrs. Dalloway, named after the character from Virginia Woolf’s novel. Clarissa has just been separated from her husband and with her, she has her daughter and grand-daughter. Little by little, Clarissa starts to feel uncomfortable in her new apartment. She tries to raise the issue to CASA, but her complaints are ignored. So, is it an old writer hallucinating things or is CASA really snooping into all details of her life through their AI assistant? That is the main theme of the novel.

It is not the first time that a novel is talking about a dystopian future where AI has full surveillance which controls our life. The repetitive nature of the theme is not my problem as it is still possible to have a good novel by the way in which it is presented. However, in this novel, she has tried to bring in too many themes – climate change, artificial intelligence, surveillance and even terrorist attacks (which was not at all necessary for this particular novel) and she did not particularly go deep into any of these themes she had chosen. Some were more important than others such as surveillance but overall, none too profound to leave a mark.

It felt to me like reading a draft and not a novel published by a well-established author given the number of references to Virginia Woolf or Romain Gary at random, without much relevance. It felt like it was only to show the dual identity of Clarissa, who is French and British, like the author of the novel Tatiana de Rosnay herself (so, even the main character is a version of the author herself).

To conclude, I had a very difficult read, and was not pleasurable at all. The idea was interesting but with a horrible narration. I award the novel a rating of two on ten.

Rating – 2/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Supercommunicators by Charles Duhigg – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Who and what are supercommunicators? They're the people who can steer a conversation to a successful conclusion. They are able to talk about difficult topics without giving offence. They know how to make others feel at ease and share what they think. They're brilliant facilitators and decision-guiders. How do they do it?

In this groundbreaking book, Charles Duhigg unravels the secrets of the supercommunicators to reveal the art - and the science - of successful communication. He unpicks the different types of everyday conversation and pinpoints why some go smoothly while others swiftly fall apart. He reveals the conversational questions and gambits that bring people together. And he shows how even the most tricky of encounters can be turned around. In the process, he shows why a CIA operative was able to win over a reluctant spy, how a member of a jury got his fellow jurors to view an open-and-shut case differently, and what a doctor found they needed to do to engage with a vaccine sceptic.

Above all, he reveals the techniques we can all master to successfully connect with others, however tricky the circumstances. Packed with fascinating case studies and drawing on cutting-edge research, this book will change the way you think about what you say, and how you say it.’

Supercommunicators is a book written by the journalist Charles Duhigg, known for his previous book The Power of Habit (click here to read my review of the book). Having loved that book, I was looking forward to reading Supercommunicators, given how important communication is in our everyday lives.

The book is split into different sections and similar to Power of Habit – the author explains the key to effective communication is answering these three questions in any situation – What’s this about, How do we feel, and who we are ?. These address the subject, emotions and identity as well, all of which have always been important to us.

The author gives examples of a CIA agent, whose job it was to recruit spies and after initial failures, how he had managed to overcome by clearly expressing how he felt. Other examples include that of a doctor who manages to engage with people who oppose vaccination and explain how people are emotional much as we try to think of ourselves as ‘logical robots’. There was also the case of Leroy Reed that the author examines, a convict in the US who was tried by the jury for violating terms of his parole and how by effective communication by one of the jurors, they could move the consensus position.

The author’s quest to simplify communication down to three simple questions is interesting and is even perhaps effective. I think I would perhaps keep that in mind the next time that I get into a conversation. The author also gave several real world examples of how these principles were used effectively.

That said, this book did not communicate effectively with me. The reason why the previous book communicated with me was that the examples were relatable whereas here, it is obscure – either someone in a scientific study or a CIA recruitment agent trying to hire someone for one of the most risky assignments, a situation which most people would never be in.

Some of what the author says is evident to most people, that nobody likes someone who is patronising or condescending. That said, some of the author’s suggestion seemed to indicate that he wanted the reader to put the other person’s needs at utmost priority, which is a good trait for a salesperson but not for a conversation among equals and I am unsure of the impact that could have on the mental health on the long run. This was the same criticism I had about How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie (click here to read my review of that book).

To conclude, I felt this was a very interesting idea for a book, but also a topic that has been written a lot about and the author did not present any significantly new ideas. There have been several books written post Covid-19 pandemic of doctors convincing anti-vaxxers using effective communication techniques, that one more added no new perspective to me. However, the small parts where the author structured the questions to be asked and answered to strike an effective communication could still be useful and pertinent. Weighing these aspects, I award the book a rating of four on ten.

Rating – 4/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Algebra of Happiness by Scott Galloway – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Scott Galloway teaches brand strategy at NYU's Stern School of Business, but often his class veers to life strategy. His students are smart and hardworking, but they struggle with life's biggest questions, just like the rest of us. What's the formula for a life well lived? How can you have a meaningful career, not just a lucrative one? Is work/life balance really possible? What does it take to make a long-term relationship succeed?

Galloway explores these and many other questions in the take-no-prisoners style that has made him a sought-after commentator and YouTube star.’

Algebra of Happiness is a book by the public speaker and YouTuber – Scott Galloway. In this book, he attempts to create a formula for happiness and how to lead a happy life. For most of it, he used examples from his own life to substantiate his ‘formulae for happiness’.

I would address the elephant in the room – this is a horrible book and does not do justice to the title. It is written by an extremely privileged man who is oblivious to his privilege. There is nothing wrong in being privileged but given that his ‘advice’ is mostly based on what ‘he did’, it is not necessarily open to everyone else – wherein, his father was the vice-president of a major company and grew up in an upper-middle-class house in Orange County California. He talks about how he could persevere and find other avenues of study that interested him even though he was very average at university – but most people in the US or anywhere else in the world do not have the safety net that he has.

Next, this is exclusively addressed to cisgendered heterosexual men. For instance, here is one of his advice:

‘Don’t ever let your wife be cold or hungry. I mean … ever.’ - did not use the gender-neutral word ‘spouse’ or just could have said ‘partner’. Moreover, if one’s wife is hungry, wouldn’t she have the independence to help herself? This whole point that one’s wife needs their husband to take care of their basic needs is a very patriarchal thought to begin with.

I fall into the demographic that the writer is targeting (cisgendered heterosexual man), but then, his advice is not entirely relevant given he was largely reinforcing patriarchal tropes such as the one above and had a kind of saviour complex. I am not against books written for a specific demographic – in this case, cisgendered heterosexual men, but then, that must be clearly stated as the objective – here the author repeatedly presents this book as though it is universal that could be read by anyone.

There were also several contradictory statements throughout the book, and I would cite some of them below:

‘The cosmos recognizes this and rewards this behavior with the deepest meaning and well-being that any of us can register. As an atheist, I believe this is it.’ - using vague words such as ‘cosmos’ / ‘universe’ rewarding oneself is often what is used by spiritual gurus and saying he believes this as an atheist, is contradictory to begin with. It is augmented by the next quote that I am adding below:

‘I’m 100 percent certain there is no god. At least not the Morgan Freeman/Lifetime/Fox version of God. However, I do pray.’

The statement above is equal to an alleged vegan saying that they would never consume animals, however, they like to catch fresh fish in the lake and eat them.

He insists on how marriage is the solution to happiness and at the same time states that he never believes marriage is mandatory. If I go on citing his contradictory statements in the book, this review would be endless, so I would stop here.

So, he is someone unsure of himself and at the same time unaware of his privilege of coming from a rich background. Of all things that the United States is known for, generous social spending is not one of them. For him to say, ‘The difference is being born in America, and the generosity of California taxpayers, who gave the child of a secretary the chance to attend a world-class university.’ - it must be noted that many people from other backgrounds cannot afford to attend these universities in the first place and the fact that he finds this generous is telling of the wealth in his family. He also conveniently cites only the profession of his mother here, whereas he does state once in his book about his father - ‘I was the only son in a nuclear family where Dad was a vice president for International Telegraph and Telegram (ITT) and Mom was a secretary.’

To conclude, this book is for cis-heterosexual men, who believe in yesteryear patriarchal tropes and if that is your thing, read this book. To all other reasonable people, avoid this at all costs. I would award this book a rating of one on ten.

Rating – 1/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Fifteen-year-old Alex doesn't just like ultra-violence – he also enjoys rape, drugs and Beethoven's Ninth. He and his gang rampage through a dystopian future, hunting for terrible thrills. But when Alex finds himself at the mercy of the state and subject to the ministrations of Dr. Brodsky, the government psychologist, he discovers that fun is no longer the order of the day ...

The basis for one of the most notorious films ever made, A Clockwork Orange is both a virtuoso performance from an electrifying prose stylist and a serious exploration of the morality of free will.’

Clockwork Orange is a novel written by Anthony Burgess, made significantly famous by Stanley Kubrick’s film that came out in 1971. The novel takes place in a dystopian future, where teenagers are running amok and that there is no law and order. We have our main character who is a fifteen-year-old and has his friends with whom he does on a rampage, when it comes to killing people or raping women. One of the pivotal points is when Alex rapes and murders a woman, which eventually leads to his arrest.

It was a difficult book to read, I do not have a problem with novels that portray a negative character as the lead, but there is often some kind of a reason or cause, there is a complexity behind that character. Alex had none of it, he was violent for the sake of being violent. Did this dystopian future enable him to be that way? At least to me, the world created by the author does not explain this violent behaviour of Alex.

There is an element of science fiction later in the novel where Alex goes through a ‘treatment’ (I would not describe what it was to avoid spoilers) but again, despite this, he never expressed any kind of repentance for what he did.

I have not seen the film but judging by what I read in this book, I have no intention of being traumatised again by such violent images. Reading it once was sufficient.

The prose was difficult, not because the language was complex but because the author invented a language. It is a mix of cockney and for whatever reason, a lot of Russian words. Some of it was ingenious, I must admit, such as ‘horror show’, which is a corruption of the Russian word хорошо (kharasho). However, I usually do not like use of constructed language unless it is relevant to the plot and in this case, I found no relevance to the plot. Moreover, what was bizarre was that it was not that the language had evolved to this, it was only Alex and his friends who were using it and other characters seamlessly understood this language.

To conclude, it was  a story without a plot. In some stories like this, I find the idea of the plot to be interesting but poorly executed but here I did not find the idea to begin with. I award the novel a rating of three on ten.

Rating – 3/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

How to Stop Fascism by Paul Mason – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘From Putin’s war on Ukraine to Trump’s assault on American democracy, we’ve seen the ideas of fascism proliferate. But why? Where did it begin? What do its new adherents believe? And how do we stop them? Fascism, Paul Mason shows, is ‘the fear of freedom’, and only a new democratic coalition can defeat it.’

How to Stop Fascism is a book from the journalist Paul Mason, mainly analysing the return of fascism in the world, with several authoritarian leaders around the world taking power in the last decade, such as Donald Trump in the US, Narendra Modi in India, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, etc. who rose to power largely by exploiting the insecurities of the majority from a ‘perceived external threat’ of the country. There are three parts to the book, with the author first introducing fascism and its ideology, then moving on to its history and finally on how we can resist it today.

To cite from the book, here is one example of the type of rhetoric employed by the above stated leaders:

‘The ideas of the these self-styled ‘philosophers’ of the far right are not simply grotesque, they would not last five minutes if subjected to the rigours of logic and analysis in an actual philosophy department. That’s why they communicate in obscure, long-winded and often unintelligible prose. However, they are persuasive.’

This is a very important topic given with rise of new technology, political ideologies that were earlier in the fringes have found effective means to reach the mainstream. Taking France for instance where I am from, the party which was earlier considered a pariah, the Rassemblement National led by Marine Le Pen, is today seen as a normal ‘opposition party’ often platformed in the mainstream media. Similar trends could be observed in other countries. The author takes the example of the 2020 Delhi riots in India (my country of origin), where there was open violence initiated against Muslims of the city following provocative speeches by the leaders of the Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The author then talks about the history, how there were similar complacencies about people writing obituaries of Mussolini’s political career in the 20s, or for that matter after Hitler’s failed Beer Hall Putsch, there was more infighting among the German left – where the Communist Party (KPD) considered the Socialist Party (SPD) as the bigger threat an ignored Hitler. The author sends us a pertinent warning that we are ignoring the present day fascists and neo nazis at our own peril. The author talked about the mobilisation of these groups, often picking up culture wars, be it on transgender rights or gay rights, as their main rallying points to enthuse their base (as is often seen in Trump rallies).

There were parts where I felt the book was a tad alarmist, where reading it, one could be convinced that fascists are just one election away from taking power from everywhere, but that said, that is also the point of the author’s book, wherein, we should avoid the complacency that good sense will prevail. The author also breaks the myth that people drawn to fascism are often those who are left behind my the establishment / are in a precarious position, rather, in case of both Mussolini and Hitler, barring their base, they had widespread support from the mainstream middle class, which is what made them efficient when they were in power.

The book largely focus on the West, occasionally touching upon India and Brazil, but I felt East Asia was largely ignored, given it has had similar tendencies in the past decade, especially the rule of President Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines. Similarly, though the People’s Republic of China is not a democracy, Xi Jinping has become the ‘strongest’ Chinese head of state since Mao Zedong, often stoking up militarist and etho-nationalist sentiment to legitimise his hold on the establishment.

To summarise and conclude, I would say that this book addresses a very important topic, given 2024 has major elections, which effectively have democracy on the ballot – be it in US or India, or for that matter the rise of vote share of authoritarian parties across several member states in EU (such as Vox in Spain). It is also very important for us to keep in mind the history that was involved, which brought fascists to power, so that we can be wary of the same history repeating itself and act accordingly. While the focus was highly on Western Europe and US, it could have concentrated on certain other regions as well. On that note, I would award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day
Andy